Both sides had already poured too many resources and human lives into this war, demonizing the other to the point of heaven versus hell that. In this way, no government could agree to anything but outright surrender from the opposing side because they would be unable to justify the war they entered in the first place.

Both sides wanted to fight until total victory. But... the population of both sides was exhausted. In addition, neither side had a large enough military or technological advantage to force strategic victories.

My guess is that without the USA, Britiana and France would slowly force Germany to a negotiated peace by Spring 1919. The terms would not be as harsh as Versaille, but wpould include the loss of all German colonies and Alsace Lorraine.

Germany didn't have the capacity to sustain war any longer, whether the Americans arrived or not. Their allies in Austro-Hungaria had already collapsed. They had no food, they were using sawdust for flour in ersatz foods due to the British blockade. During the Spring Offensive, timetables couldn't be met because troops often refused to advance from captured positions; they were busy eating provisions that were left behind. By 1918, a major famine was underway in Germany and not just among civilians.

Then came the Spanish flu.

Germany didn't stand a chance to continue. Had the November Revolution not happened, Germany may have pushed itself forward to a disastrous conclusion. But the November Revolution did happen, and once it did, the war would have been concluded even if Germany had been doing better than it was.

General Petain never promised that french army will only fight in defense, He restored the trust of the soldiers by eliminating the tactics which, expensive in human blood, did not look of good results.

The mutinies arrived logically : with a napoleonic tactic, french generals et colonel sent soldiers to attack with bayonets in squeezed row in front of the german machineguns without artillery support. For all the war, France lost 1.500 000 men died in battle, and 600 000 of them were lost only in the first monthes ( from august 1914 to early 1915). Explain why french generals were so bad at the beginning of this war is too difficult and complex, because it concerns the French domestic policy of period 1895-1914.

Then, the French artillery remaining weaker than the German artillery, the French soldiers often had to attack without support, while they saw that opposite the Germans were better supported. General Nivelle counted on the breasts of his soldiers to overcome the German artillery and the machine guns. He underestimated his opponents, etc. There is a lot of exemples of this kind of things, where french soldiers were sent to attack without ou unsignifiant artillery support.

French soldiers fought in northern France, 100 to 150 kilometers from the border, so a lot of soldiers didn't know anything about their families, and all others were offended by the fact that they did not manage to push away, after 3 years of war, the Germans of France. Furthermore, the provisioning was inferior, the insufficient rests and there were no permissions.

Pétain restored the trust of soldiers with promising that all attacks will be supported by artillery, and ordered that only useful attacks be done. After 1917, the french army is more powerfull and effective as it never war during this war : good commanders, experimented soldiers, artillery.

The rôle of United State army (regardeless the logistic support to Allies) is not very important, because Germans asked for armistice before the US Army gives all its power. Hindenburg and Ludendorff asked Wialliam II to ask armistice after 1918, august the 12, because they knowed that it was already possible to ask it ; for know, the military defeat was far to be total : german army was on rearwalk, but still in France. Waiting only few monthes and allied will be on the road of Berlin : Pétain and Pershing thought that the armistice have to be signed after the german army pushed back in Germany. They prepared a great attack in Lorraine for november, but the armistice of 11/11 stopped this project. If sucessfull, this attack would be the start of the big end of german army.

For me, the question is not "what would happened if US dis not enter the war", but "what would happened if Allies wait that US army was at its higher level, for attack in automn 1918 and refused the armistice of 11/11". For me, the war would be ended in 1919, and not in 1945.

Explain why french generals were so bad at the beginning of this war is too difficult and complex, because it concerns the French domestic policy of period 1895-1914.

No country and no generals were prepared for 1914. The Germans, French, British, Russians etc. all fought with the same Naploeonic tactics. For example, tens of thousands of untrained German university students died making bayonet charges against British regulars in September 1914. German historians call it the "Slaughter of the Innocents".

The main factor seems to be the huge size of the armies. With the exception of the British, all other European nations had millions of men in the reserves. The slogan "Every man a citizen, Every citizen a soldier" was the rule of the day. The vast magority of these men could not be trained in anything other than parade ground drills. When millions of these men marched off the parade ground and into machine guns and 75mm cannon fire, the result was a disaster

Hmm this it tricky but its still very possible for either the Soviets to conquer all of Europe, or the Nazis have a bitter peace with the Russians thus the Russians acquire land all the way up to the Oder-Neisse line.

Hmm this it tricky but its still very possible for either the Soviets to conquer all of Europe, or the Nazis have a bitter peace with the Russians thus the Russians acquire land all the way up to the Oder-Neisse line.

Explain why french generals were so bad at the beginning of this war is too difficult and complex, because it concerns the French domestic policy of period 1895-1914.

No country and no generals were prepared for 1914. The Germans, French, British, Russians etc. all fought with the same Naploeonic tactics. For example, tens of thousands of untrained German university students died making bayonet charges against British regulars in September 1914. German historians call it the "Slaughter of the Innocents".

The main factor seems to be the huge size of the armies. With the exception of the British, all other European nations had millions of men in the reserves. The slogan "Every man a citizen, Every citizen a soldier" was the rule of the day. The vast magority of these men could not be trained in anything other than parade ground drills. When millions of these men marched off the parade ground and into machine guns and 75mm cannon fire, the result was a disaster

I agree, but there are some specific things for France. I think that the disasters of 1914 would have been able to be less grave if certain generals had not been pushed aside for coarse reasons.

On the other hand, after the desasters of 1914, other nations were not so slow to change, and they did not benefit from the striking experience of 1870 as France. If you can read French, about it : http://gustave.club.fr/doctrine_militaire.htm

The participation of the USA in WWI was the first step to spread out the gravest plague called "Liberalism" across the world. If the USA never entered WWI, Liberalism which implants incoherent thoughts into people's mind would not exist. Otherwise, the like of liberalism would come out as well.

Besides, i don't see Germany resisting against the Allied powers any longer, since she was in a pathetic status for a prolonged battle. Russia's socialism takes over the seat of liberalism and covering all the way up to the western Europe, as the USA is absent. Germany could not have recovered herself due to probable ongoing retaliation of the Allied powers. She ends up annexed to France.

America vs. Socialist Europe, i have no idea which one of them wins out. A conditional armistice signed in favour of Europe might finish the devastating bloodshed. Another story is that they somehow manage to get along well in peace in the first place. They obviously, sooner or later, discern that the truce can not be maintained for so long.

What collapsed on 11 November 1918 was not Germany but the historical epoch and dynamic known as the "Age of Imperialism". The economic and social exhaustion of Europe as a whole was already fact in 1918 and did not require 1945 to confirm it. Nevertheless, the posit behind this thread is as fruitless as that other game with history, "[W]hat if the South had won the Civil War?".

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum